P.S. renewables are also fine, and their costs might be competitive, but the anti-nuclear and anti-geoengineering stance by @Greenpeace et al. reveals that they don't really want to solve the problem rationally.
Show this thread
Seems to me, if the Left cared about reducing global warming, they'd support nuclear power and geoengineering research, instead of attacking the free markets that are lifting billions out of poverty.https://twitter.com/neiltyson/status/1018928667215499273 …
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Nah, nuclear power is doomed by the economics...supporting it is fine but it's on the way out no matter what. And geoengineering is strictly inferior to carbon removal tech
-
Eh, while somewhat true, the left has been knee-jerk against all nuclear power options, including modern micro nuclear systems, which have much better safety and economics. I've attempted to have these convos with my fellow lefties, but they'll have none of it.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Some of the people who care about global warming (whichever side) also feel that the learning from fossil fuels is look out for toxic legacies and are concerned that nuclear could turn out the same but worse. (some also worry about toxic legacies of batteries)
-
Nuclear generates the smallest waste footprint of any energy source by orders of magnitude. Solar alone generates 200-300 times more. And unlike any other waste product it can both be stored and recycled back through the system multiple times. Only 5% of energy is released.
- 3 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Or we could support water, wind, and solar power instead of nuclear.... since those containers have way too many issues and injure quite a few people
-
False. Nuclear power has the highest efficiency of fuel types, can be recycled. Nuclear is green and all natural. Athena, read up on disposing those batteries needed for those other kinds of power sources.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
I have three videos explaining the nuclear fuel cycle which I use the metaphor of burning wood which I think pretty well gives a good overview of it.https://youtu.be/iIquFFFtFWQ
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
nuclear is no longer viable economically vs. other clean energy alternatives.
-
What could possibly justify this? Hydro is the only plausible competitor to nuclear power with current technology, but it's obviously not as scalable because we can't build new rivers.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.